In 2013, I ran the Boston Marathon, finishing in 2:28:28 for 67th place. I was student teaching and training on inconsistent 60-70 mile weeks. Even though I wasn't in great marathon shape, that race still stands as my personal best. For comparison's sake, here are some historic results of similar placings (Boston's archived results are nearly impossible to find - I'm not even sure they exist online). 1993: 67th place - 2:32:01 1989: 50th place - 2:30:14 1983: 83rd place - 2:19:51 (a 2:30 would have been over 300th place!) 1980: 54th place - 2:25:47 1979: 50th place - 2:19:28 (source: http://www.coolrunning.com/boston/results3.htm) The general trend seems to be that as we look at results from further in the past, race results actually get faster! How does that make any sense? Since then, training methods have improved, performance technology has improved, prize money has improved; so why haven't we improved? While road races have flourished in the dec
Inside the mind and legs of a sub-elite distance runner